As i write this I am reading of a NASA mission to repair the Hubble telescope and what a deliriously successful mission it is.
My question, with prejudice, is…what business does the government have spending MY tax dollars on boondoggles like the Hubble telescope, Mars exploration, and other purely academic endeavors which cannot possibly hope to resolve any of our real problems here on this planet?
It strikes me that the government is funneling enormous quantities of $$ into the gaping maws of the scientific community purely to appease their wet dreams of academic fulfillment with absolutely no prospect of recovering anything which might remotely help this society.
I say enough. If there is commercial potential in space exploration than there will be a company or two who will invest in it. Until then give me my damn money back. I don’t care about the Big Bang. I don’t care if there used to be life on Mars and I certainly don’t want to pay for these mindless explorations to learn the answers just because some geek can’t go to bed at night without the answers to these questions.
Well, when we began exploring space there was the very real possibility, at least in the minds of scientists, that we would have to colonize it some day when the earth became inhospitable (think: Cold War).
Now, as we explore Mars and the Moon for signs of life, water, o2, etc., there is the very real possibility, at least in the minds of scientists, that we may have to colonize one or the other some day when the earth becomes inhospitable (think: Global Warming, etc.)
Eddie, I would suggest you do some research on the services and research NASA funds before you make such sweeping statement. NASA’s total budget this year is a mere $13.5 billion; a drop in the bucket when you consider the federal government’s total outlay.
In addition, NASA funds many scientific research facilities. One of their functions is to make basic science discoveries available to corporations and individuals. The research facilities are available here. http://www.mne.ksu.edu/development/MEDEPT/orgs/aiaa/research.html
Businesses can buy the rights to this information and then market products for sale to the general public. One obvious example is Velcro. Try these links for more information on technology transfer to the private sector. http://www.nctn.hq.nasa.gov/http://www.nasatech.com/
I would suspect that NASA actually makes money for the government when you consider the taxes paid by these corporations on the profits generated from the sale of these products. I couldn’t find any numbers to back up that statement, but it seems likely. So, maybe NASA actually costs you nothing at all.
Easy one-step assembly instructions.
Pour Beer A in Uncle B.
The space program is one of the most worthwhile endeavors our government has going. It touches on everything from ecology to religion to technology to our future as a race or a world power. It covers politics and medicine and agriculture…the list goes on and on. Ooops! I forgot our national favorite - Television! I support it wholeheartedly and the guys that do it are the true heros of this century. They have balls of steel and I defy any punk-ass gang-banger to come up with half the courage, smarts, balls, etc. Talk about tough guys! No one else even comes close! They are the best!
Why did the Queen of Spain fund Colombus’ expidition when everyone new it was a waste of money because he would just fall of the edge of the world?
Humans are curious explorers. We want to know everything there is to know. If you want to bitch about waste of tax money, then start complaining about how profession sport teams black mail cities into building new stadiums for them.
I would like to take a moment to express my gratitude that the majority of the American public is not as short-sighted, provincial and unimaginative as EddietheDane.
Thank you.
The best lack all conviction
The worst are full of passionate intensity.
*
I just love thinking about the possibilities of colonizing another planet. We would have the opportunity to use the knowledge we’ve gained from our successes and failures here, and work toward something that will have true meaning to EVERYONE. The technology alone is mind-boggling! They will try to send some guys there with NO RETURN FUEL and make the fuel they will use to return. Unbelievable. Here’s a question: Which do you find scarier – spending time under the sea or spending time in outerspace – say, 1-2 years?
Oh, and as a slight aside, about 10-12 years ago, while in still in high-school, I did a brief essay on NASA and its impact on the economy. To put it simply, so far every dollar we have spent into NASA has on the average resulted in 3-5 dollars out. There are two parts to this. The first part is the same as with any large complex organization that relies on secondary companies. The money goes into NASA, which then hires a company like Morton-Thikal(sp), who hires people who spend the money buying goods and thereby improve the economy, while we get something usefull out of it. The second part is the discoveries and inventions of NASA. If you think you would have your Pentium III today if it weren’t for NASA supporting a lot of the research into miniturization back in the 50’s and 60’s, I got news for you. We probably just now be starting to build IC’s. The initial research was heavily funded by NASA, and it is research that required a lot of money, money more than well spent.
>>Being Chaotic Evil means never having to say your sorry…unless the other guy is bigger than you.<<
I don’t know this for a fact, but I have a very strong feeling that we have been trolled in the OP. (Just for the record, I too feel that the space program and its offshoots are very important and worth more money that we invest in them. My largest complaint with NASA is that they are not doing as good a job as they might on advancing it. See years of Jerry Pournelle commentary for details.)
Question, Eddie: does the epithet in your user name come from Jutlandic or Sjaellandic ancestors? Or is “Mun-” clipped from it? :))
There are even more everyday things that came from space R & D – Velcro, Teflon, and Gortex come to mind. Actually, most really useful stuff comes from military and space technology. I am always amazed at the kind of person who would get into a cramped little “cooler” and volunteer to be shot a gizillion miles from Earth, with NO HOPE OF RESCUE if something should go wrong. And they never think that they’re something special. This is just a natural part of their fiber – to be part of something that could literally change the world. They seem to have a level of self-purpose and focus that is far beyond anything the general public is capable of.
The colonization of Mars is a cool subject in that they plan to create the environment from scratch, using seedlings and such, so that the enviroment, over a period of hundreds of years, will change so that we can live there. I realize much of it is conceptual at this point, but it is all possible as far as science can tell at this point.
What makes you think anyone is “avoiding” it? IIRC, NASA went out of their way to photograph it on the last successful mission. Anyway, aside from the stupid “face” and “pyramid,” just what makes Cydonia a scientifically preferable landing site?
“It’s my considered opinion you’re all a bunch of sissies!”–Paul’s Grandfather
Well, let’s see, how many missions have successfully landed on mars since MGS took the latest batch of photos in April 1998? Let me think . . . that’s, uh, zero. Yeah, they’re avoiding it. And the rest of Mars, apparently.
Of course, by your reasoning, they’re “avoiding” every other spot on Mars where they haven’t landed or scheduled a landing. Why is NASA avoiding Mars’ North Pole? Is it because they know that Santa Claus didn’t REALLY conquer the Martians, and was in fact killed and replaced by an extraterrestrial Santa based at Mars’ North Pole? It’s a conspiracy!!
Yes, let’s land to examine rock structures that were clearly shown by photgraphic images at 14 ft.-per-pixel to be nothing but rock and sand. That sounds like it should definitely be NASA’s overriding concern for future Mars missions.
Why is it that some people, when given an explanation that turns out to be mundane, simply can’t accept it?
“It’s my considered opinion you’re all a bunch of sissies!”–Paul’s Grandfather
The fact is that although no probes have successfully landed, the Cydonia site has never been a designated landing site.
The Cydonia site is the most remarkable site of all known Mars locations.
Phil further writes:
Yes, but rock and sand assembled by something more than mere coincidence? How are you so sure? Could it possibly be that there is an unnatural pattern to this area of rock and sand?
These are the questions that need further examination.
I’ve been kind of dissapointed with NASA since I read Feynman’s “What Do You Care What Other People Think?”. He wrote about what big mess NASA is. In theory I like the idea of space exploration and money going to science but if what Feynman found about the Challenger explosion applies to the rest of NASA then I’m not expecting anything important to come from them. He wrote about all the politics that go on in there and the lack of communication and how they try to skew results so they can get more funding. Basically, it’s an organization whose primary goal is to perpetuate itself. Space exploration has become secondary.